DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5, Line 3, “the resonator” should be rewritten as –the respective resonator--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 10-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ashida (US 10950917).
As per Claim 1:
Ashida discloses in Figure 1: A dielectric body (“dielectric filter”, 1) including a plurality of dielectric layers (the dielectric portion 4 includes a multilayer stack composed of a plurality of dielectric layers, [Col. 6, Lines 57-59], therefore the dielectric body inherently has a plurality of dielectric layers located therewithin, constituted by the plurality of dielectric layers as disclosed) and having a rectangular parallelepiped shape (as is evident by the rectangular shape of Figure 1 and related Figure 4) and including a first lateral surface (“bottom surface”, 4a) and second lateral surface (“top surface”, 4b) in a direction orthogonal (surfaces 4a and 4b extend across F2, corresponding to the x-direction, as defined in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below, as is further evident by related Figure 4) to a first direction (F1, corresponding to the y-direction and defined in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below), and a first region (R1, as defined in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below) where a plurality of resonators (“resonator body”, 3A-3D) in the multilayer body and extending in a first direction (F1) orthogonal to a stacking direction (z-axis) of the multilayer body are arranged (the resonator bodies 3A-3D are within the dielectric filter 1 and are extending across F1 which is orthogonal to the z-axis stacking direction, as evident by Figure 1), and second regions (R21 and R22, as defined in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below) where the plurality of resonators are not arranged (resonator bodies 3A-3D are not arranged within the second regions R21 and R22, as shown in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below), and the first (4a) and second lateral surface (4b) in the first region (R1) extend to a greater extent in the first direction (F1) than the first lateral surface (4a) and the second lateral surface (4b) in the second regions (R21 and R22, as is evident by the extent of the R1 region being greater than that of R21 and R22 as shown in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below, wherein lateral surfaces 4a and 4b inherently overlay the structure within the space of the side surfaces 4c-4f and have the same regions as shown in annotated Image 1 of related Figure 2 below, as is evident by related Figure 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
564
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image 1
As per Claim 2:Ashida discloses in Figure 1:
The dielectric filter further comprising
a first (“separation conductor layer”, 6, is inherently a plate electrode due to the plate formation, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art) and second plate electrode (“shield conductor layer”, 72, is inherently a plate electrode due to the plate formation, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art) inside the multilayer body (1) and spaced apart in the stacking direction (6 and 72 are spaced apart in the z-axis direction, as is evident by related Figure 4), a first (“separation conductor layer”, 6, also serving as a part of the shield portion 7 and therefore is inherently a shield conductor, [Col. 8, Lines 22-23]) and second shield conductor (“shield conductor layer”, 72) arranged respectively on the first lateral surface (4a, where layer 6 is placed on surface 4a, as is further evident by related Figure 4, [Col. 8, Lines 33-35]) and second lateral surface (4b), conductor 72 is placed on surface 4b, as is further evident by related Figure 4, [Col. 8, Lines 35-37) and connected to the first conductive plate (6) and second plate electrode (72), where the conductive electrodes 6 and 72 are inherently connected to themselves since they are the same structure), wherein the plurality of resonators (3A-3D) are arranged between the first (6) and second plate electrode (72, as is evident by 3A-3D between 6 and 72 as further shown in related Figure 4) and each have a first end connected to the first shield conductor (as is evident by the connection of 72 to the top portion of 3B and 3C as shown in related Figure 4) and a second end spaced from the second shield conductor (as is evident by the spacing of 6 with 3B and 3C shown in related Figure 4).
As per Claims 10-11 and 13:
Ashida discloses in Figure 1:
The dielectric filter, wherein (as per claim 13) the first shield conductor (“separation conductor layer”, 6) and the second shield conductor (“shield conductor layer”, 72) are provided by applying and firing (as per claim 10) a metal paste to the respective first and second lateral surface and/or (as per claim 11) by performing sputtering or plating on the respective first (4a) and second lateral surface (4b, the end product was achieved by conductor layers 6 and 72 being provided on the top and bottom surfaces 4a and 4b, examiner has not given any patentable weight to the method steps regarding the applying and firing of a metal paste and sputtering or plating in the patentability of the final product as claimed).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-9, 12, and 14-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL YALDO whose telephone number is (703)756-1784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM - 4 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at (571) 272-5918. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABIGAIL AMIR YALDO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights